Caro Terry, le Tue considerazioni sono sempre creative e stimolanti. Per me l'informazione è in-centrata sulla forma, sullo stato, sulla condizione topologica di un qualcosa che può considerarsi un "testo" o con-"testo" il cui significato non può non essere interpretato.Ma esistono cose a questo mondo che non debbono essere significate o interpretate? La meccanica quantistica mi spinge a rispondere negativamente. Quindi la relazione tra in-formazione e significato è strettissima. Grazie e chiedo scusa per la mia in-form-azione linguistica. Saluti. Francesco Rizzo.
2015-09-12 22:08 GMT+02:00 Terrence W. DEACON <dea...@berkeley.edu>: > Reminders of old news. > > In defense of Stan: The use of the term "variety" as a generic stand-in > for Shannon's concept of signal entropy traces to W. Ross Ashby, in his > excellent effort to demystify information theory and cybernetics for the > nontechnical reader. It is appropriate, then, to assume that use of the > term "variety" is agnostic about the form of a particular reference > distribution being assumed. > > About bringing "meaning" into the discussion: As Bob Ulanowicz emphasized > in his paper "Shannon exonerata" from a couple of years ago, Shannon's > analysis implicitly includes two complementary ways of understanding > information: The entropy of a signal channel and the difference or > reduction of entropy of a received message-bearing signal (that which is in > effect "missing" in a received message signal). And these have opposite > signs. This complementarity also indicates the intrinsically relational > nature of the concept of information. What sign (+/-) to assign information > became a controversial issue between Shannon and Wiener, especially since > Wiener wanted to equate information with negentropy. Recognizing this > complementarity and relationality resolves this. Although what Bob calls > the "apophatic" aspect of information can be seen to be linked to reference > and "meaning" these statistical and semiotic properties should not be > confused. As Loet suggests, we would be wise not to slip into a tendency to > equate statistical signal features with meaning. Reference, meaning, > significance, etc. are not intrinsic to a communication medium, but are > defined relative to an interpretive process, the details of which are for > the most part entirely bracketed from the analysis. For these reasons, > although these interpretation-dependent properties are dependent upon > statistical properties of the medium, they cannot be reduced to them > without loss. > > — Terry > > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Stanley N Salthe <ssal...@binghamton.edu> > wrote: > >> Reacting to my: >> >> S: Well, I have generalized the Shannon concept of information carrying >> capacity under 'variety'... {variety {information carrying capacity}}. >> This allows the concept to operate quite generally in evolutionary and >> ecological discourses. Information, then, if you like, is what is left >> after a reduction in variety, or after some system choice. Consider dance: >> we have all the possible conformations of the human body, out of which a >> few are selected to provide information about the meaning of a dance. >> >> Jerry responded: >> >> Stan's post is a superb example of how anyone change the semantic meaning >> of words and talk about personal philosophy in context that ignores the >> syntactical meaning of the same word such that the exact sciences >> are generated. Of course, this personal philosophy remains a private >> conversation. >> >> S: I really need a translation of this statement. >> >> STAN >> >> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Jerry LR Chandler < >> jerry_lr_chand...@me.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear Steven, Pedro and List: >>> >>> Two excellent posts! >>> >>> Steven: I look forward to your ratiocinations and there connectivity >>> with symbolic logic. >>> >>> It is my view that one of the foundational stumbling blocks to >>> communication about syntactical information theory (and its exactness!) is >>> the multi-meanings that emerge from the multiple symbol systems used by the >>> natural sciences. >>> >>> Stan's post is a superb example of how anyone change the semantic >>> meaning of words and talk about personal philosophy in context that ignores >>> the syntactical meaning of the same word such that the exact sciences >>> are generated. Of course, this personal philosophy remains a private >>> conversation. >>> >>> Steven and Pedro (and I), by way of contrast, are seeking a discussion >>> of public information and the exactness of public information theory. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Jerry >>> >>> >>> Words to live by: >>> >>> *"The union of units unifies the unity of the universe"* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 11, 2015, at 7:22 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: >>> >>> Dear Steven and FIS colleagues, >>> >>> Many thanks for this opening text. What you are proposing about a pretty >>> structured discussion looks a good idea, although it will have to >>> confront the usually anarchic discussion style of FIS list! Two aspects >>> of your initial text have caught my attention (apart from those videos >>> you recommend that I will watch along the weekend). >>> >>> First about the concerns of a generation earlier (Shannon, Turing...) >>> situating information in the intersection between physical science and >>> engineering. The towering influence of this line of thought, both with >>> positive and negative overtones, cannot be overestimated. Most attempts >>> to enlarge informational thought and to extend it to life, economies, >>> societies, etc. continue to be but a reformulation of the former ideas >>> with little added value. See one of the last creatures: "Why Information >>> Grows: The Evolution of Order, from Atoms to Economies" (2015), by Cesar >>> Hidalgo (prof. at MIT). >>> >>> In my opinion, the extension of those classic ideas to life are very >>> fertile from the technological point of view, from the "theory of >>> molecular machines" for DNA-RNA-protein matching to genomic-proteomic >>> and other omics' "big data". But all that technobrilliance does not >>> open per se new avenues in order to produce innovative thought about the >>> information stuff of human societies. Alternatively we may think that >>> the accelerated digitalization of our world and the cyborg-symbiosis of >>> human information and computer information do not demand much brain >>> teasing, as it is a matter that social evolution is superseding by >>> itself. >>> >>> The point I have ocasionally raised in this list is whether all the new >>> molecular knowledge about life might teach us about a fundamental >>> difference in the "way of being in the world" between life and inert >>> matter (& mechanism & computation)---or not. In the recent compilation >>> by Plamen and colleagues from the former INBIOSA initiative, I have >>> argued about that fundamental difference in the intertwining of >>> communication/self-production, how signaling is strictly caught in the >>> advancement of a life cycle (see paper "How the living is in the >>> world"). Life is based on an inusitate informational formula unknown in >>> inert matter. And the very organization of life provides an original >>> starting point to think anew about information --of course, not the only >>> one. >>> >>> So, to conclude this "tangent", I find quite exciting the discussion we >>> are starting now, say from the classical info positions onwards, in >>> particularly to be compared in some future with another session (in >>> preparation) with similar ambition but starting from say the >>> phenomenology of the living. Struggling for a >>> convergence/complementarity of outcomes would be a cavalier effort. >>> >>> All the best--Pedro >>> >>> >>> >>> Steven Ericsson-Zenith wrote: >>> >>> ...The subject is one that has concerned me ever since I completed my >>> PhD in 1992. I came away from defending my thesis, essentially on large >>> scale parallel computation, with the strong intuition that I had disclosed >>> much more concerning the little that we know, than I had offered either a >>> theoretical or engineering solution. >>> >>> For the curious, a digital copy of this thesis can be found among the >>> reports of CRI, MINES ParisTech, formerly ENSMP, >>> http://www.cri.ensmp.fr/classement/doc/A-232.pdf, it is also available >>> as a paper copy on Amazon. >>> >>> >>> Like many that have been involved in microprocessor and instruction >>> set/language design, using mathematical methods, we share the physical >>> concerns of a generation earlier, people like John Von Neumann, Alan >>> Turing, and Claude Shannon. In other words, a close intersection between >>> physical science and machine engineering. >>> >>> >>> ...I will then discuss some historical issues in particular referencing >>> Benjamin Peirce, Albert Einstein and Alan Turing. And finally discuss the >>> contemporary issues, as I see them, in biophysics, biology, and associated >>> disciplines, reaching into human and other social constructions, perhaps >>> touching on cosmology and the extended role of information theory in >>> mathematical physics... >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Fis mailing list >>> >>> Fis@listas.unizar.es >>> >>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> Pedro C. Marijuán >>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group >>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud >>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) >>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X >>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain >>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) >>> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es >>> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Fis mailing list >>> Fis@listas.unizar.es >>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Fis mailing list >>> Fis@listas.unizar.es >>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fis mailing list >> Fis@listas.unizar.es >> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis >> >> > > > -- > Professor Terrence W. Deacon > University of California, Berkeley > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > >
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis